Andy Murray on Clay.Is he in the top 10?

A point I read elsewhere (but can't remember - sorry if it was you) was that while Andy isn't a naturally good clay courter, he is still a top level player, and big game player. He's got a lot of experience of playing in slams and winning three sets, and playing in front of big crowds etc. That's why he should always be considered a better chance for going deep at RG than a lot of clay court specialists who might have had more successful clay careers in the smaller tournaments.

I know Andy did spend quite a bit of time on the clay courts in Spain, but I wonder if he never properly learned to move on clay because he was able to beat his opponents anyway. We need to remember that Andy had been playing for years and was already very successful by the time he got there, so those basic habits were entrenched. He should really have got the hang of it in his time there, but it's hardly the same as learning to play on it from the age of five.

A point I read elsewhere (but can't remember - sorry if it was you) was that while Andy isn't a naturally good clay courter, he is still a top level player, and big game player. He's got a lot of experience of playing in slams and winning three sets, and playing in front of big crowds etc. That's why he should always be considered a better chance for going deep at RG than a lot of clay court specialists who might have had more successful clay careers in the smaller tournaments.

I know Andy did spend quite a bit of time on the clay courts in Spain, but I wonder if he never properly learned to move on clay because he was able to beat his opponents anyway. We need to remember that Andy had been playing for years and was already very successful by the time he got there, so those basic habits were entrenched. He should really have got the hang of it in his time there, but it's hardly the same as learning to play on it from the age of five.

^ this Andy is still able to beat clay court specialists, just because he has had one bad tournament doesn't mean the whole clay court season will be bad for Andy.

Well its Novak versus Rafa in the final of Monaco. So only 4 months into the season and its the same players winning the Slams and Masters events. For the rest even reaching a semi-final must seem like winning the tournament! Pity Andy appears so far behind the other 3 on clay though. That result was a real shocker.

Andy says a lot of things, really. He's just not that comfortable on clay. Those are, undoubtedly, who grew up on it.

I don't buy this argument. Why are the other big 3 great players on all surfaces? Rafa grew up playing on clay but he's still won Wimbeldon. If Novak grew up on hard why is he such a great clay-courter and grass player. Ditto Fed. Andy is a great grass player but how many grass court tournaments would he have played growing up?

Im beginning to think Andy's loss was more due to the fact its early in the tournament and a new surface but not specifically because its clay. Just like he's vulnerable in hard-court tournaments in the early rounds because of the different bounce/speed etc. If he had got past Stan he'd prob have reached the semis.

^ That's a good point BigNose- the clay has something to do with it but Andy's definitely vulnerable early on in tournaments though better now gotta say.And Stan is good on clay, junior RG champ, I believe?

I don't buy this argument. Why are the other big 3 great players on all surfaces? Rafa grew up playing on clay but he's still won Wimbeldon. If Novak grew up on hard why is he such a great clay-courter and grass player. Ditto Fed. Andy is a great grass player but how many grass court tournaments would he have played growing up?

Im beginning to think Andy's loss was more due to the fact its early in the tournament and a new surface but not specifically because its clay. Just like he's vulnerable in hard-court tournaments in the early rounds because of the different bounce/speed etc. If he had got past Stan he'd prob have reached the semis.

I hope you realize that Andy has never made a clay final let alone win one. His losses on clay are mostly due to the surface than it is anything else. Other times it could be some other factor depending on the tournament and Andy's schedule.

Nadal turned pro in 2001 and he won Wimbledon in 2008, so he basically had to wait 7 years to win a grass title. On the other hand, he won RG in 2005 and kept on winning it. Nadal was taken out of Wimbledon by a 100 ranked player named Rosol in the 2nd round in 2012 when he was in his prime. You'd never see that happening to players like Sampras or Federer in their prime who happen to be terrific on grass. That tells you Nadal is actually not a natural grass court player. Nole is not as great on clay as it's made out to be. He couldn't win RG and got beaten by Federer when he was unleashing big time in 2011. Next year, in 2012, he got beaten by Nadal. In fact, he got beaten by Nadal in 3 major tournaments on clay in that year.

Andy is great on grass and it's mainly because they have a big tournament going on - Wimbledon and grass is in the blood even if there aren't as many grass tournaments. This surface in fact originated from that country so again it's in the blood. The history of Wimbledon is long and extensive. Almost all the players from Britain used to be very good grass court players. That's not an coincidence.

Also don't forget the slowness of the surface. Nadal would have never won 1 single title on grass if you'd transferred him back to the 90s. He would have been dismantled and destroyed by the big servers on a daily basis.

There is also the fact that there are very few grass tournaments, and not many players play on it often outside of that season or growing up, so none of them will have grown up on it. Ivan says he wasn't a natural on grass, and he struggled to get the hang of it each season, whereas he had no such problems on clay, while for Andy it's the opposite way around.

I've seen quite a few people say that Nadal is more vulnerable at Wimbledon in week 1 than week 2, because he needs that first week to get the hang of things, and relies on his opposition being much lower ranked, and possibly also intimidated. The other angle is that the green grass of week 1 plays differently to the more worn stuff in week 2 and suits him better.

It's fair to say that Andy can be vulnerable early in any tournament and that clay is not his best friend. You add those two things together, put him against an opponent who is of a decent standard, natural on clay, and had more practice on the surface going into the match than Andy, and it all counts against him.

I know some people moan that top seeds are advantaged by always getting byes, but I do wonder if Andy might prefer to play in round one on clay.

When it comes to clay, Nadal doesn't need week 1 or 2; he can come back from 7 months long break and still can win a few tournaments on clay. I doubt he would have won IW had it been his first tournament after the long break.

When it comes to clay, Nadal doesn't need week 1 or 2; he can come back from 7 months long break and still can win a few tournaments on clay. I doubt he would have won IW had it been his first tournament after the long break.

I always felt that Rafa would make a great and strong comeback after his injury. But even I'm not sure if he would have won IW. Any player in his place would obviously opt to play a smaller tournament first to test their fitness and injury.

Isn't Andy's problem on clay partly his knee, which makes sliding harder for him whereas the clay is better for Rafa's knees? Also if he's still working on getting the balance right between his new aggressive play and the defensive play he is more comfortable with, isn't it the case this coud be more difficult for him on clay? He himself said he started hitting the ball short when hitting so many ues against Stan. So I'm hoping Lendl can help him with this and I'm sure hitting with Berdych will help and hitting 1 against 2 will help.

Daily Mail article this morning discussing how Andy's team are telling him he has to hit the ball harder on clay because the clay slows the ball down. If he hits it too soft it sits up and the likes of Stan can "kill him". Since this is the first time Andy has ever played on clay (in fact he's never even seen a clay court before) I think we should give him a bit of lee-way. You can't learn to play on clay over-night after all.

Daily Mail article this morning discussing how Andy's team are telling him he has to hit the ball harder on clay because the clay slows the ball down. If he hits it too soft it sits up and the likes of Stan can "kill him". Since this is the first time Andy has ever played on clay (in fact he's never even seen a clay court before) I think we should give him a bit of lee-way. You can't learn to play on clay over-night after all.

I'm confused with what you say about Andy never playing on clay ??? In the Daily Mail he says ‘You want high standards, but not so high that they can become detrimental to you if things don’t always go right,’ said Murray, beaten by Nadal in his first Paris semi-final two years ago.'